REBT

1

What is Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy (REBT)?:

Outlining the Approach by Considering the Four Elements of its Name

Windy Dryden Ph.D

Goldsmiths University of London

REBT

2

Introduction

There have been many approaches to outline the defining features of Rational

Emotive Behaviour Therapy (e.g. Dryden, 2009, Ellis, 1994) but none have done

so just by detailing the four elements that comprise the name of the therapy: i)

rational; ii) emotive iii) behaviour and iv) therapy. In this article I will show how

you can teach trainees about REBT by using this four element approach. As you

read the article, please note that I am addressing trainees and students who do

not know about the approach or are relatively new to it.

Rational

When Albert Ellis established the therapy in the 1950s, he called it “Rational

Therapy” (Ellis, 1958). He did so because he wanted to stress that emotional

problems are based on irrational thinking and that if we are to address these

REBT

3

problems effectively, we need to change such thinking to its rational equivalent.

It is interesting to note that while REBT has had two previous names, the term

“rational” is common to all three names. It is the constant feature that spans

REBT’s 50+ year old history. So what do REBT therapists currently mean by the

term “rational”? I can best answer this question if I contrast it with the term

“irrational”

The terms “rational” and “irrational” in current REBT theory are most commonly

used as adjectives in front of the noun “beliefs”. Such beliefs can also be

thought of as attitudes in that they describe a person’s stance or position

towards something.

Let me consider the major characteristics of rational beliefs and contrast

these with the major characteristics of irrational beliefs. In what follows, I will

consider the rational belief in the left hand column and the irrational belief in

the right hand column to facilitate the comparison.

REBT

4

A Rational Belief is Flexible or Non-extreme

1. A rational belief is flexible

Here is an example of a rational belief that is

flexible.

“I want my colleague to like me, but she does not have to do so”

Imagine that you hold such a belief. As you do so

you will see that this belief is flexible because while

you assert what you want (i.e. “I want my colleague to like me…”), you also acknowledge that you do not

have to get what you want (i.e. “…but she does not have to do so”).

2. A rational belief is non-extreme

Here is an example of a rational belief that is non-

extreme.

“It is bad if my colleague does not like me, but not the end of the world”

An Irrational Belief is Rigid or Extreme

1. An irrational belief is rigid

Here is an example of an irrational belief that is

rigid.

“My colleague has to like me”

To compare this belief with the flexible version in

the left-hand column, we need to state it in its full

form

“I want my colleague to like me, therefore she has to do so”

Again imagine that you hold this belief. As you do so

you will see that this belief is rigid because while

you not only assert what you want (i.e. “I want my colleague to like me…”), you also demand that you

have to get it (i.e. “…therefore she has to do so”)

2. An irrational belief is extreme

Here is an example of an irrational belief that is

extreme.

“It is the end of the world if my colleague does not like me”

To compare it to the non-extreme version in the

left-hand column we need to state it in its full form

“It is bad if my colleague does not like me, and

REBT

5

Again imagine that you hold this belief. As you do so

you will see that this belief is non-extreme because

while you assert that you find the event negative

(i.e. “It is bad if my colleague does not like me…”), you also acknowledge that such an evaluation is not

extreme because it could always be worse (i.e. “…but not the end of the world”).

therefore it is the end of the world”

Again imagine that you hold this belief. As you do so

you will see that this belief is extreme because you

not only assert that you find the event negative (i.e.

“It is bad if my colleague does not like me…”), you

also claim that it could not be worse (i.e. “…and therefore it is the end of the world”).

A Rational Belief is True

Imagine that you hold the following rational belief

that I introduced above: “I want my colleague to like me, but she does not have to do so”. You will

note that this belief is made up of two parts:

“I want my colleague to like me....”

“.... but she does not have to do so”

Let’s take one part at a time. First, you can prove

that you would like your colleague to like you; after

you this is your desire. Also, you can probably cite

reasons why you want your colleague to like you (e.g.

it makes for a good working relationship where you

can help each other). So, the first part of your

belief is true.

Now let’s look at the second part of the rational

belief. You can also prove that the other person

does not have to like you. To state otherwise would

An Irrational Belief is False

Now imagine that you hold the following irrational

belief that I introduced above: “My colleague has to like me” . Again this belief is made up of two parts:

“I want my colleague to like me....”

“.... and therefore she has to do so”

Let’s take one part at a time. First, you can again

prove that you would like the other person to like

you for reasons discussed opposite. So, the first

part of your belief is true.

Now let’s look at the second part of the irrational

belief. You cannot prove that your colleague has to

like you. If that were true, she would have no choice

but to like you. This demanding component of your

REBT

6

be to deny that person free choice.

So if both parts of this rational belief then we can

say that the belief taken as a whole is true.

irrational belief in effects robs your colleague of

free choice, which she retains in the face of your

demand. Thus, this second part is false.

As both parts of a belief have to be true for the

belief to be true the we can say that the irrational

belief is false.

Also, when we consider this irrational belief in its

short form (i.e. “My colleague has to like me”) then

it is clear that it is false since it again attempts to

rob your colleague of the freedom not to like you

which she does in reality have.

A Rational Belief is Sensible

Taking the rational belief: “I want my colleague to like me, but she does not have to do so” we can ask

the question: does this belief make sense? We can

answer that it does since you are explicitly

acknowledging that there is no connection between

what you want and what you have to get.

An Irrational Belief is Not Sensible

Taking the full form of your irrational belief: “I want my colleague to like me, and therefore she has to do so” we can again ask the question: does this

belief makes sense? Here our answer is that it does

not because it asserts that there is a connection

between what you want and what you have to get.

The idea that because you want something you have

to get it is, in fact, childish nonsense when coming

from an adult.

A Rational Belief is Largely Constructive

When you hold a rational belief the consequences of

doing so will be largely constructive. For example

let’s suppose that you hold the following rational

belief: “I want my colleague to like me, but she does not have to do so” and you bring this belief to a

situation where your colleague snaps at you for no

good reason. In this situation you will experience

three different, but related consequences which I

will now illustrate:

An Irrational Belief is Largely Unconstructive

When you hold an irrational belief the consequences

of doing so will be largely unconstructive. For

example let’s suppose that you hold the following

irrational belief: “My colleague must like me” and

you bring this belief to the situation where your

colleague snaps at you for no good reason. In this

situation you will experience three different, but

related consequences which I will now illustrate. As

I do so, compare these consequences to those that

stem from your belief if it were rational (see

opposite)

Emotional consequence

REBT

7

Emotional consequence

Here you will tend to concerned about your

colleague’s response, but not anxious about it

Behavioural consequence

Here you will be likely to enquire of your colleague

in an open way if there is anything wrong

Thinking consequence

Here you will tend to think that your colleague is

upset with someone or something which could be to

do with you, but may well be nothing to do with you

Here you will tend to anxious, rather than

concerned about your colleague’s response

Behavioural consequence

Here you will tend not to avoid your colleague or try

desperately to get her to like you

Thinking consequence

Here you will tend to think that your colleague is

upset with you rather with someone or something

that had nothing to do with you

Emotive

The term “emotive” in REBT means that which is relevant to your emotions. Like

every other approach to therapy REBT is based on a model of emotions. Since

REBT is a therapeutic approach it is primarily concerned with relieving people’s

emotional disturbance. However, it also acknowledges that people are bound to

have negative emotions when faced with negative life events (henceforth called

adversities in this book). To accommodate these two positions REBT

REBT

8

distinguishes between emotions that are negative in tone and have largely

unconstructive consequences and emotions that are negative in tone and have

largely constructive consequences. The former are known as unhealthy negative

emotions (UNEs) and the latter healthy negative emotions (UNEs).

The REBT Model of Emotions

The REBT model of emotion states that the emotions that we experience are

based largely on the beliefs that we hold about ourselves, others and the world.

More specifically it states that our unhealthy negative emotions about life’s

adversities are based largely on the irrational beliefs that we hold about these

adversities and that if we want to experience healthy negative emotions about

the adversities in question we need to change our irrational beliefs to rational

beliefs.

This is shown in the following figure in which “A” stands for adversity, “B” for

beliefs and “C” for the consequences of these beliefs (in this case the emotional

REBT

9

consequences). This is REBT’s famous ABC model which you can find outlined in

any REBT textbook (e.g. Dryden & Branch, 2008).

A B C

Adversity Irrational Beliefs Unhealthy Negative Emotions

Adversity Rational Beliefs Healthy Negative Emotions

Let me illustrate this model by referring to the example that I introduced

earlier in this chapter

A B C

Adversity

My colleague may not like me

Irrational Belief

My colleague must like me

Unhealthy Negative Emotion

Anxiety

Adversity

My colleague may not like me

Rational Belief

I want my colleague to like me,

but she does not have to do so

Healthy Negative Emotion

Concern

REBT

10

Because life’s adversities are negative, it is not appropriate for you to feel good

about them or even neutral about them. It is healthy to experience negative

emotions, but not problematic ones about such life events. These problematic

emotions in REBT are known as unhealthy negative emotions (UNEs) and these

are listed in the following table and contrasted with their healthy negative

equivalents

Unhealthy Negative Emotions Healthy Negative Emotions

Anxiety Concern

Depression Sadness

Guilt Remorse

Shame Disappointment

Unhealthy Anger Healthy Anger

Hurt Sorrow

Unhealthy Jealousy Healthy Jealousy

Unhealthy Envy Healthy Envy

REBT

11

I want to make two points here;

1. As detailed above, unhealthy negative emotions (UNEs) largely stem from

irrational beliefs about life’s adversities while healthy negative emotions

stem largely from rational beliefs about these same adversities.

2. We do not have commonly agreed words in the English language to

describe healthy negative emotions. The terms that I have used in the

right hand column of the above table are my own. Feel free to use

alternative terns that are more meaningful to you.

Intellectual vs. Emotive Understanding

The other major area where the term “emotive” comes up in REBT is in

distinguishing between two different types of understanding: intellectual

understanding and emotive understanding (Ellis, 1963). These are particularly

REBT

12

important when a person is trying to change an irrational belief to its rational

belief alternative.

Let me illustrate this distinction by using the above example where you

currently hold the irrational belief (i.e. “My colleague must like me”) and your

colleague has snapped at you. Let’s suppose that you acknowledge that your

irrational belief is irrational (meaning that it is rigid, false, not sensible and

largely unconstructive – see above). And let’s assume, furthermore, that you

acknowledge that your rational alternative belief (i.e. I want my colleague to like

me, but she does not have to do so”) is rational (meaning that it is flexible, true,

sensible and largely constructive. When your understanding of these two points

is intellectual in nature, you say things like “Well, I can understand this in my

head, but not in my heart” and “I understand it, but I don’t feel it”. Here, you

will still feel anxious about the prospect of your colleague not liking you, you will

act in ways that are consistent with your irrational belief (i.e. you will either

avoid your colleague or desperately try to get her to like you) and you will tend

to think in highly distorted ways about your colleague (e.g. “She is definitely

upset with me” and “If I don’t win her over immediately, she will never like me

again”). In other words, while you understand intellectually the reason why your

REBT

13

irrational belief is irrational belief and why your rational belief is rational, this

understand has little or no impact on your emotions, behaviour and subsequent

thinking. You still think, act and feel in ways consistent with your irrational

belief even though you know it is irrational.

However, when your understanding of these points is emotive in nature, you not

only grasp the points intellectually, but you also feel, think and act in ways that

are consistent with the rational belief and that are inconsistent with the

irrational belief. Thus, you will feel concerned, but not anxious about the

prospect of your colleague not liking you, you will act in ways that are consistent

with your rational belief (i.e. you will check out with her why she snapped at you)

and you will tend to think in realistic ways about your colleague (e.g. “She may or

may not be upset with me” and “If she is upset with me, we can talk it though

and resolve the issue”). In other words, you understand the reason why your

irrational belief is irrational belief and why your rational belief is rational and

this understanding has a decided constructive impact on your emotions,

behaviour and subsequent thinking. You think, act and feel in ways consistent

with your rational belief.

REBT

14

In REBT, we argue that intellectual understanding is a necessary, but

insufficient ingredient for constructive psychological change and many of the

chapters in this book are devoted to helping you to move from such intellectual

understanding to the emotive understanding necessary for such change to occur.

Behaviour

The term “behaviour” in REBT refers to both overt behaviour and to an urge to

act that is not translated into overt behaviour. The latter is known as an action

tendency. REBT’s model of behaviour parallels its model of emotions in arguing

that irrational beliefs tend to lead to behaviour that is largely unconstructive in

effect and that rational beliefs lead to behaviour that is largely constructive in

effect. The former is associated with unhealthy negative emotions (UNEs) and

the latter and the latter with healthy negative emotions (HNEs).

REBT

15

This is shown in the following figure in which “A” stands for adversity, “B” for

beliefs and “C” for the consequences of these beliefs (in this case the

behavioural consequences).

A B C

Adversity Irrational Beliefs Unconstructive Behaviour

Adversity Rational Beliefs Constructive Behaviour

Let me illustrate this model by referring again to the example that I introduced

earlier in this chapter

REBT

16

A B C

Adversity

My colleague may not like me

Irrational Belief

My colleague must like me

Unconstructive Behaviour

Avoidance of colleague

Desperate attempts to get

colleague to like me

Adversity

My colleague may not like me

Rational Belief

I want my colleague to like me,

but she does not have to do so

Constructive Behaviour

Asking colleague directly if

there is anything wrong

In the table below, I outline the major behaviours associated with the eight

unhealthy and healthy negative emotions listed above.

REBT

17

Unhealthy Negative Emotion with Healthy Negative Emotion with

Associated Unconstructive Behaviours Associated Constructive Behaviours

and Action Tendencies and Action Tendencies

Anxiety

Withdrawing from threat

Avoiding threat

Seeking reassurance even

though not reassurable

Seeking safety from threat

Concern

Confronting threat

Seeking reassurance when

reassurable

Depression

Prolonged withdrawal from

enjoyable activities

Sadness

Engaging with enjoyable

activities after a period of

mourning or adjustment to the

loss

Guilt

Begging for forgiveness

Remorse

Asking, not begging, for

forgiveness

Shame

Withdrawing from others

Avoiding eye contact with

Disappointment

Keeping in contact with others

Maintaining eye contact with

REBT

18

others

others

Hurt

Sulking

Sorrow

Assertion and communicating

with others

Unhealthy anger

Aggression (direct and

indirect)

Healthy anger

Assertion

Unhealthy jealousy

Prolonged suspicious

questioning of the other

person

Checking on the other

Restricting the other

Healthy jealousy

Brief, open-minded questioning

of the other person

Not checking on the other

Not restricting the other

Unhealthy envy

Spoiling the other’s enjoyment

of the desired possession

Healthy envy

Striving to gain a similar

possession for oneself if it is

truly what you want

REBT

19

The behaviours listed are above are what a person does or tends to do when her

irrational or rational belief about an adversity has been fully activated.

However, the impact of belief on behaviour can be seen in other ways.

Short-term Self-protective Behaviour

In the ABC model that I have presented in this article, an adversity occurs or is

deemed to occur at “A”, the person holds a belief about this adversity at “B”

and experiences emotional, behavioural and thinking consequences of holding

this belief at “C”. In this model the person’s belief (e.g. “My colleague must like

me”) is specific to the specific adversity that she encounters.

However, beliefs can be held at a more general level (e.g. “People with whom I

work must like me”) and when a belief is more general in nature, the person has

a tendency to bring such a belief with them, as it were, to situations where a

relevant adversity may occur. Thus, in our example, if a person holds a general

irrational belief (e.g. “People with whom I work must like me”), then the person

REBT

20

will be hypersensitive to the possibility of not being liked by a colleague and act

to prevent this adversity actually occurring (e.g. by being extra nice to a person

whom she thinks may, but has not yet shown her some disapproval). In this way

the person is acting to protect herself in the short-term, but the longer-term

effect of this behaviour is unconstructive in a number of ways:

She does not get to test out her hunch that the person will disapprove of

her

She does not get to deal constructively with such disapproval should it

occur and

She tends to maintain her irrational belief since she is acting in a way

that is consistent with it

Over-compensatory Behaviour

When a person holds an irrational belief and particularly one that is general in

nature, then she may try to deal with actual or potential adversities by behaving

REBT

21

in a manner that is over-compensatory. By using over-compensatory behaviour

the person is trying to prove to herself the opposite of what she actually thinks

is the truth about her, the other person or the world. A common example of

this occurs when a person privately considers that he would be weak if he can’t

deal with a challenge, but tries to prove to himself that he is strong by facing

an even greater challenge.

Therapy

The word “therapy” comes from the Greek "therapeia" meaning "a service, an

attendance" which, in turn, is related to the Greek verb "therapeuo" meaning "I

wait upon."

REBT therapists, therefore, can be seen to offer a “service” to people who have

problems in a number of areas: i) emotional problems; ii) practical,

REBT

22

dissatisfaction problems and iii) personal development problems (Bard, 1980,

Grieger & Boyd, 1980 ; Wessler & Wessler, 1980). A distinctive feature of REBT

is that it outlines a logical order for dealing with these problems.

Disturbance before Dissatisfaction

REBT argues that unless there are good reasons to the contrary, it is best for

us to address our emotional problems before our dissatisfaction problems

(Dryden, 1985). The reasoning is as follows. If we try and deal with our

dissatisfaction before we deal with our emotional disturbance, then our

disturbed feelings will get in the way of our efforts to change directly the

adversities about which we are dissatisfied.

For example, let’s take the example of Paul who is dissatisfied about his wife’s

spending habits. However, he is also unhealthily angry about her behaviour and

every time he talks to her about it he makes himself angry about it, raises his

voice to his wife and makes pejorative remarks about her and her spending

REBT

23

behaviour. Now what is the likely impact of Paul’s expression of unhealthy anger

on his wife? Does it encourage her to stand back and look objectively at her own

behaviour? Of course, it doesn’t. Paul’s angry behaviour is more likely to lead his

wife to become unhealthily angry herself and/or to become defensive. In Paul’s

case, his anger had, in fact, both effects on his wife. Now, let’s suppose that

Paul first addressed his unhealthy anger and then discussed his dissatisfaction

with his wife. His annoyance at her behaviour, but his acceptance of her as a

person would help him to view her own behaviour perhaps as a sign of emotional

disturbance and his compassion for her would have very different effects on

her. She would probably be less defensive and because Paul would not be

unhealthily angry, then his wife would also be less likely to be unhealthily angry.

With anger out of the picture, the stage would be set for Paul to address the

reasons for his dissatisfaction more effectively.

Disturbance before Development

REBT

24

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, I used to go to a number of encounter

groups. This was the era of personal growth or development. However, there

were a number of casualties of these groups and when these occurred it was

because attendees were preoccupied with issues of emotional disturbance and

they were being pushed too very hard to go into areas of development that

warranted greater resilience.

In general then, it is very difficult for us to develop ourselves when we are

emotionally disturbed. To focus on areas of development when someone is

emotionally disturbed is akin to encourage that person to climb a very steep hill

with very heavy weights attached to their ankles. First, help the person to

remove their ankle weights (i.e. address their emotional disturbance) before

discussing the best way of climbing the hill!

Dissatisfaction before Development

REBT

25

Abraham Maslow (1968) is perhaps best known for his work on self-

actualisation. The relevance of this concept for our present discussion is this.

It is very difficult for humans to focus on higher order “needs” when we are

preoccupied with issues with respect to lower-order needs. Thus, if a person is

faced with a general dissatisfying life experience which cannot be

compartmentalised and also wants to explore his writing ambitions, he should

address the former first unless this life dissatisfaction will help him write a

better book!

While I have outlined REBT’s preferred order in dealing with problems, it also

values flexibility. Thus, if a person wants to deal with his problems in a

different order, he should do so and observe the results. If it works, that is

fine. If not then REBT’s preferred position may prove to yield better results.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating!

Conclusion

REBT

26

While outlining REBT by considering the four elements that comprise its name is

not comprehensive, it does introduce trainees and other students relatively

unfamiliar with REBT with some of its key elements.

REBT

27

References

Bard, J.A. (1980). Rational-emotive therapy in practice. Champaign IL:

Research Press.

Dryden, W. (1985). Marital therapy: The rational-emotive approach. In W.

Dryden (Ed.), Marital therapy in Britain. Volume 1: Context and therapeutic

approaches. London: Harper & Row

Dryden, W. (2009). Rational emotive behaviour therapy: Distinctive

features. London: Routledge.

Dryden, W., & Branch, R. (2008). The fundamentals of rational emotive

behaviour therapy: A training handbook. 2nd edition. Chichester: Wiley.

Ellis, A. (1958). Rational psychotherapy. The Journal of General

Psychology, 59, 35-49.

Ellis, A. (1963). Toward a more precise definition of "emotional" and

"intellectual" insight. Psychological Reports, 13, 125-126.

Ellis, A. (1994). Reason and emotion in psychotherapy, Revised and

updated. Secaucus, NJ: Carol.

REBT

28

Grieger, R. M. and Boyd, J. (1980). Rational–emotive therapy: A

skills-based approach. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Maslow, A. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. New York: Van

Nostrand.

Wessler, R. A. and Wessler, R. L. (1980). The principles and practice of

rational–emotive therapy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.